Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santa Barbara Libertarians help win Boy Scout discrimination fight
LP News ^ | February | LP

Posted on 02/15/2002 6:50:19 AM PST by DoSomethingAboutIt

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 441-457 next last
To: Roscoe
There are plenty of communities in America, with different laws and practices.

In only very limited ways. Sure they can do little things like zoning. But read the Constitution very closely, and see if states and communities have the rights they are afforded under the Constitution.

I for one wouldn't seek to destroy the ability of all communities to establish moral standards. I would compromise. I'd be willing to settle for the constitutional republic the founders gave us. However, I'd campaign on a local level for a libertarian government that only prohibited force or fraud.

If only you could agree to that. You might think you would, but would you give up the federal drug war and send the issue back to the states? Could you do the same for abortion, and all the other things you'd like to use the fed for that aren't anywhere in Article I, Section 8?

Unless you are, you shouldn't talk to me of communities and states rights because you don't respect them to begin with.

141 posted on 02/19/2002 9:13:39 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
But read the Constitution very closely, and see if states and communities have the rights they are afforded under the Constitution. I for one wouldn't seek to destroy the ability of all communities to establish moral standards. I would compromise. I'd be willing to settle for the constitutional republic the founders gave us.

Many Libertarians on FR deny that communities even have rights. Glad to see a different approach.

You might think you would, but would you give up the federal drug war and send the issue back to the states?

That sounds like a policy direction worth considering.

142 posted on 02/19/2002 9:22:00 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Khepera
I agree that use of force is such a situation would be moral, but I'm not quite sure I could categorize it as initiation, since its use is in response to people harming those around them. I could be argued that the perps are initiating force by mis-appropriating public space against the will of those around them.
143 posted on 02/19/2002 9:22:08 AM PST by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
The thing is, when if they move in next to me?

I'm glad you asked. Us libertarians debate such things amongst ourselves in order to find solutions. For your dilemma, we have given our libertarian stamp of approval to deeded communities.

In such a community, you would contractually consent to not do things that would disturb your neighbors. If your neighbor violated his contract and started having crack and hooker parties on his front yard in front of your kids, he would be guilty of fraudulent breach of contract, and you could have him evicted, and damages done to you would be remedied in civil court.

This solves your problem without resorting to 3 AM Paramilitary style assaults upon your neighbor, and possibly yourself, if they get the wrong address.

Oh, and all those prison guards that would have guarded your neighbor in jail for the next 10-20 years would have to go get real jobs. The money you save in taxes for their salaries could go back into your neighborhood if you like, to make it a nicer place. Maybe you could spend it on a nice new park for your kids in the spot where your crackhead neighbor used to live.

Whattd'ya think?

144 posted on 02/19/2002 9:24:54 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
You are being a cowardly little liar by insisting I made any such statement.
131 posted by tpaine

"Even bigots have rights," he said. [speaking generally]

I just love his moral backbone. -TA79-

It is already estabished that it takes more backbone to fight for a slimeballs rights that to cheer for the king. - tpaine -

What other conclusion can be drawn?

Indeed, -- such a conclusion could obviously only be drawn by a liar, - by a snotty little punk, like you, attempting a smear.
To equate the scouts with slimeballs only took place in your fevered imagination, you scum. -- Say it isn't so, or lose even more of your rapidly disappearing crediblity.

Keep up these kind of crap argumenitive tactics, and soon only the roscoes of this site will respond to you with anything but scorn.

145 posted on 02/19/2002 9:28:34 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Dakmar
OK. Well you know the libertarians engage in a lot of fun word games. I suppose if we argue the meaning of "IS" long enough we will find some other meaning or use for it. You’re a good guy Dakmar. Thank you for helping me explain.
146 posted on 02/19/2002 9:28:55 AM PST by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
That sounds like a policy direction worth considering.

Wow, I think we have an agreement.

Who'da thunk it.

Kind of funny that the solution to our problem was solved over 200 years ago. Founders were very wise.

147 posted on 02/19/2002 9:32:11 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
This solves your problem without resorting to 3 AM Paramilitary style assaults upon your neighbor, and possibly yourself, if they get the wrong address.

That's nice but if the guy was having these parties, I wouldn't be to satisfied with a court summons. I would like the activity to cease and desist. That usually takes an arrest. When I get a speeding ticket, I just try not to get caught, but I still speed. See what I'm getting at?

And as for these deeded communities, well how big should they be? How much trouble would it be to get an entire city under one deeded community? A city could not function under several different standards. It appears to me this has already been taken care of by our founders with states. States then decide what decisions can be left to counties and cities.

And I don't have a problem with not giving long jail sentences to drug USERS. I think fines and mandatory treatments would suffice.

148 posted on 02/19/2002 9:32:52 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Ok tpaine. I will admit, you can't be taken for you word. So I guess it is possible you don't feel that way. I apologize.
149 posted on 02/19/2002 9:35:03 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Oh? Apartment managers who engage in racial discrimination against tenants are breaking the law.

If you refuse to rent an apartment from any black owner, have you broken the law?

If you refuse to work for any Asian employer, have you broken the law?

"Racial discrimination in housing and employment" is in fact not "illegal."

For some of us.

Do you support the enactment of our current anti-discrimination laws? Do you support in particular the enactment of the federal laws selectively targeting a portion of the discrimination in "housing and employment"?

150 posted on 02/19/2002 9:36:32 AM PST by untenured
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I disagree with you, -- that the writer is a member of the klan, -- or would repeat one of their fantasies, -- and, -- I doubt that is one of their fantasies.

It wouldn't surprise me that you made that accusation up, like so many others.
You are a practiced liar, as your scout/slimeball remarks above prove.

151 posted on 02/19/2002 9:37:34 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
I think you would have to start a new community to do this, or buy up all the property in an existing community. It's kind of like covenants - if you move into a neighborhood where one exists you have to abide by it, but they cannot impose one on a pre-existing neighborhoos unless everyone agrees.
152 posted on 02/19/2002 9:38:55 AM PST by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Bull
153 posted on 02/19/2002 9:38:57 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Smile-n-Win
agains -> against
154 posted on 02/19/2002 9:41:15 AM PST by Smile-n-Win
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"Next, they'll make it illegal for White men to refuse to marry Black women."

Are you agreeing with that or not?

155 posted on 02/19/2002 9:41:50 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

Comment #156 Removed by Moderator

To: Texaggie79
I wouldn't be to satisfied with a court summons.

Would you prefer fraud be a criminal offense? That would still satisfy libertarian principles. In my example, your neighbor could then be arrested for breach of contract, then you could still pursue your civil case.

And as for these deeded communities, well how big should they be?

The market would decide that. Higher demand will bring more and larger communities.

How much trouble would it be to get an entire city under one deeded community?

Depends on the city. In most cases it wouldn't be easy (not impossible) to get a whole city to agree to a contract, yet those are the problems free people face. We aren't utopians you know, and never said liberty would be easy or free.

It appears to me this has already been taken care of by our founders with states. States then decide what decisions can be left to counties and cities.

You and I both agree on the 9th and 10th Amendment and the ability to establish such places, and we agree that this right is no longer recognized. It is said that SCOTUS sees the 10th as a dead letter. It seems we have a common foe here.

157 posted on 02/19/2002 9:43:42 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Dakmar
I think you would have to start a new community to do this, or buy up all the property in an existing community.

This is how states were started. There is no need. Unless you can claim to own all the rights to your property. You cannot however. The reason being, either the gov first owned the land and sold it to a private owner, or the private owner of the land consented to entering into that contract with his land in exchange for the benefits and protection of being part of that state and nation.

158 posted on 02/19/2002 9:44:15 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
From a punk like you, thats as close as I'll ever get to an admission that you were wrong. -- Cograts on fessing up.
159 posted on 02/19/2002 9:45:26 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: untenured
If you refuse to rent an apartment from any black owner, have you broken the law?

Not that I'm aware of. If you refuse to rent to a prospective tenant because of his or her race, you're in violation of our laws.

Libertarian doctrine would legalize such racial discrimination.

160 posted on 02/19/2002 9:50:18 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 441-457 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson